Re: [lkcd-devel] Re: What's left over.

Eric W. Biederman
2002-11-10T02:59:30Z

"Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org> writes:

> {warning: cc: list too large :}
>
> On 9 Nov 2002, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> | There are two cases I am seeing users wanting.
> | 1) Load a new kernel on panic.
> | - Extra care must be taken so what broke the first kernel does
> | not break this one, and so that the shards of the old kernel
> | do not break it.
> | - Care must be taken so that loading the second kernel does not
> | erase valuable data that is desirable to place in a crash dump.
> | - This kernel cannot live at the same address as the old one, (at
> | least not initially).
>
> Conceptually we would like a new kernel on panic, although
> I doubt that it's normally safe to "load a new kernel on panic."
> Or maybe it depends on the definition of "load."
>
> What I'm trying to say is that I think the new kernel must
> already be loaded when the panic happens.
> Is that what you describe later (below)?

Yes that was my meaning. The new kernel must be preloaded.
And only started on panic.